Lizbie1

Not just Balanchine...

The timings when the RB did it in 2017 were: Emeralds 35 minutes Rubies 20 minutes Diamonds 35 minutes Plus two intervals, each of 25 minutes. (I don't know if "1 interval" is an error, it seems strange.) So it's 90 minutes plus interval(s), though the George Balanchine Trust website thinks it should be 81 minutes of dancing.

To expand on my experience: I only clicked the "buy" button at 9.02 (got delayed by work!) and then waited in the queue for 10 minutes. By the time I was through at 9.12, most remaining tickets were nosebleed/restricted but a few slightly better ones were still available. I don't begrudge the scarceness of tickets for public booking as it seems right to me that parents and RBS Friends take priority. (To be clear, ROH Friends did not get priority booking for the RBS show.)

I was a couple of minutes late to join booking (got distracted by a minor work emergency) so had a nervous 10 minute wait while I queued for the RBS performance, which opened this morning for everyone not RBS-affiliated, including Friends. Not many tickets left by the time I got there but I'm happy to have got anything frankly! The process worked fine for me - it's been a while since it didn't.

I've had plenty of experience of booking systems both in the UK and abroad, and (though of course there are things I'd change) I can honestly say the ROH one is among the clearest and most intuitive. And as BBB says, queueing is pretty standard when booking opens anywhere. I think what makes us so critical of the ROH system here is that we are aware of the competition for certain tickets and any delay makes us anxious. Most venues offering ballet and opera don't, alas, have the same pressure, so it doesn't bother us as much. I'd also much rather have the ROH system than the somewhat old-fashioned set-up at Munich and Stuttgart - there are probably others - whereby you get your request in by a certain date, specifying a band, and you are then allocated (if you are lucky) a ticket without having any say about the seats. Only after that process is online booking opened.

Selling out a performance is not the same thing as maximising revenue. If the house is 5% unsold but at prices 10% higher than would have sold out the house, all other things being equal they have achieved a higher box office take. (I know that this doesn't account for other things such as bar revenues, as well as intangibles.) I wish it were otherwise but it seems likely this is part of their calculation. There is a risk of falling the wrong side of the equation but they would have balanced that against the less obvious risk of leaving money on the table. The was an interview with the late Chairman of the ROH board, where he said that the speed with which the last Ring sold out indicated to him that the prices were set too low. I think he was missing the point in a few ways, but I couldn't say that he was incorrect.

Furthermore, isn't it the widely observed custom that dancers approach the potential new company - as they are fully entitled to do! - rather than the other way around? In this respect, ballet companies go further than any workplace I can think of to avoid accusations of poaching well-trained and highly regarded people.

I don't know how it's edited for the live performance, but typically don't they film several performances before the live one in case there is footage required from it? If so, there would be continuity problems if they make changes. Also I imagine the director will presumably have a plan for the scene in question which it might be impossible to revisit in time. I agree though that I am likely clutching at straws.

Possibly (though not probably?) they are waiting until after the live broadcast to fix it.

Some people have mentioned the discontinuation of packages here, so I thought it might be interesting to throw in what Paris Opera have done. Their subscription model has been substantially rejigged, with discounts varying not according to where you are sitting in the house - this season there were no discounts for the lower tiers - but to what show you are booking: four of them (all operas) attract a 25% discount; thirteen (including some ballets) attract 15%; the rest have no discount. This is if you are booking for four or five shows; if you are booking for six or more, the discounts are 30%, 20% and 5% respectively. From my point of view this is a welcome innovation and I'd like to see ROH adopting something similar.

I am a Paris Opera subscriber (live performances, not streaming) this year so have just had the brochure through for next season. The covering letter says that if I renew I can "sign up for Paris Opera Play, our new streaming service, with a 50% discount on the yearly subscription". But then the ROH has gone very quiet on the subject of subscriptions / packages anyway so 🤷🏻‍♀️.

I'm not sure the RB's record was much better.

Long ago, before I'd seen much ballet at all or heard of Jewels, my (very cultured, New York native) flatmate talked about being taken to see it as a teenager and sitting there thinking, "when is this going to end?" That has rather coloured my view of Jewels ever since.

I did wonder!

That's pretty much where I am, but there are doubtless compelling reasons for the switch.

I'm an admirer of both Rojo and Marston, so this is not meant to slight either, but it seems likely there is a "push", in whatever form, as well as a pull going on here. IMO now is the worst time for anyone from outside to be drawing conclusions about the new directors: it's a bit like football pundits trying to predict the outcome of the season based on the summer transfer market.

Just had an email saying Kunstkamer will be replaced by Jewels. Quite a switch!

I haven't looked into it but it could be that the "outliers" are related to the years when ACE's multi-year funding announcements fall.

If the box office said April 26th that's likely when it is. I don't know where the idea that the first Wednesday of April is the "usual" date comes from. From my recollection it's highly variable; a look at press releases (which only go back a few years on the ROH website) has the 19/20 season announced on May 19th; then Covid happened; then 21/22 was "previewed" in late March and announced fully on 1st June. (I don't have the stamina to check back through the forum for announcements before then.)

I must be very lucky, because "drug use, sexual violence and suicide" have so far not been part of my "real life". IMO Macmillan seems almost to enjoy dwelling on the dark side of human nature as much as some other ballets may emphasise the upside. There is more light than shade in most people's lives. And there is no shame in sending an audience out happy!

It's been hit and miss lately. There's been a few seasons where very long runs of Boheme and Traviata have not done the business that they evidently expected (and it was headed that way before Covid, so I don't think we can just blame that). Meanwhile, Britten operas - which it is my understanding have had a reputation for being box office poison - have sold out well in advance. The Britten operas were cheaper and had shorter runs, but I think Management have been slow to adjust to changing patterns. I would be very surprised if they hadn't expected Innocence to need reduced prices and offers to shift tickets. It was never going to be a big seller.

Probably off topic, but I'm not sure the opera side has done such a good job of predicting what will be a "big seller" of late.

I would quite like to see someone from the press asking these questions too.

Who gets to decide? One of the things that bothers me most - IF it's true - is that nobody at ROH is prepared to come out and say it and defend this position. Instead all we can do is speculate about whether core repertoire has been quietly shelved and why. It's so cowardly!

How intriguing!